Are we fair to WotC?

[mlund]

It's by and large edition warring by proxy. The loudest and most frequent voices hammering WotC are 3.X/Pathfinder preachers doing the same thing they've been doing since Wizards dropped the OGL and moved onto 4E and aggrieved 4E players who see their edition being put out the pasture.

Lots of people just want to convince everyone to play their way, to ensure there's more consumers for their play style of game and thus more content to use and a larger pool of potential player.

No matter how many modules and adventure paths are sold for Pathfinder it doesn't get the "big dog" treatment of criticism like the D&D franchise does, because nobody seems as invested in trying to tear them down as a vocal minority of 3.X advocates are in making sure there are more and more tables and adventures catering to their their Quadratic Wizards etc. The next runners up are the hold-overs trying to start an international workers' strike until WotC gives them back their buxom female Dragonborn Warlords.

And then there are the aggrieved amateur game designers who are cheesed off that they aren't designing Next and the outside-looking-in window that is the Playtest that just goads them on.

That's really the crux of the matter, at least as I see behavior on the boards I visit

- Marty Lund

 

[dd.stevenson]

It's by and large edition warring by proxy.

This. However, Wizards makes a rich target for edition warriors precisely because they've been weak, inconsistent custodians of the brand.

 

[Jester David]

Most of the staff over at WotC seems like good guys. Really nice people who care about the game, care about the hobby, and care about the fans.

The big problem is they're not WotC, they just work there. The real power behind WotC is the upper management. The management above the individual brands and the head moved over from Hasbro. The suits who don't care about the game(s) but set the policy and have final say on all the products. The lawyers who set the policy to Cease & Desist first and ask questions never. The corporate attitude as if WotC was some huge company rather than some small niche company. (Such as the contract they tried to foist on Stan! insisting all ideas he had while working for WotC belonged to them.)

The lack of communication with the fans is really representational of WotC. Mearls and co. have really tried to change this but still chafe under the restrictions. More often than not they come off as talking heads; they're unable to vary from the party line and really engage with fans. They need to seek approval on all comments, which delays answering questions and addressing concerns. The constant need to spin events as if the fanbase will implode if they talk to us like adults.

 

[sheadunne]

If they would stop pulling lines of product that I enjoy, I'd probably be more fair. But I'm like that with all companies that stop making something I like. There are certainly still lines of product that I purchase, but not nearly as much as in the past. It wasn't 4e that made me grumble at WOTC, it was the canceling of DDM. Sigh.

 

[Jester David]

It's by and large edition warring by proxy. The loudest and most frequent voices hammering WotC are 3.X/Pathfinder preachers doing the same thing they've been doing since Wizards dropped the OGL and moved onto 4E and aggrieved 4E players who see their edition being put out the pasture.

I'd disagree.

There's a lot if unhappiness now from 4e fans. Especially now that their edition is being given the 3e treatment. And there was a lot of WotC flaming early in the days of 4e before Pathfinder was really a thing.

While some hate aimed at WotC can be edition warring there are plenty of valid concerns and complaints that should not be dismissed so lightly.

 

[mlund]

There's a lot if unhappiness now from 4e fans. Especially now that their edition is being given the 3e treatment.

There's a difference between unhappiness and the disproportionate heaping of abuse for fun and profit. People can be critical for feeling like there are features being left out of DNDNext and that's different then some sort of rage-quit rant about discontinuing support for your edition. There's also a difference between being critical that you are missing something you can use without taking away from other players and being cheesed off that your favorite degenerate, spotlight-hogging mechanic de-jur got hit with a NERF bat. There's fair criticism and unfair criticism and the issue is unfair criticism / disproportionate response.

Interestingly enough, 4E players aren't getting the 3E treatment. There's no OGL for 4E - no potential for 3rd party carry-over etc. They've got it much worse.

And there was a lot of WotC flaming early in the days of 4e before Pathfinder was really a thing.

Certainly. Pathfinder was never the cause. It just made good bank catering to / capitalizing on the flaming as free marketing to get to a wider audience beyond the rage-quit fringes.

While some hate aimed at WotC can be edition warring there are plenty of valid concerns and complaints that should not be dismissed so lightly.

I'd say the "unfair" portion is about 80% edition-warring vs. 20% does-not-play-well-with-others.

- Marty Lund

 

[Dannager]

WotC keeps repeating basic mistakes. They don't know how to market. They offended large swathes of their audience when making 4e (losing a lot of fans to Pathfinder), and now they're insulting their audience when making 5e (4e fans can go elsewhere is the attitude I'm getting from them).

Can we please put a stop to this? You're not being insulted. 3e fans weren't being insulted when 4e came out. 4e fans aren't being insulted now. I was a 3e fan, and I never once felt insulted by the release of 4e. I am a 4e fan and I definitely haven't felt insulted by 5e's build-up. So they certainly weren't insulting the entire 4e or 3e fanbase. There are people who are acting insulted (and I can certainly guess as to why), but that doesn't mean it's actually taking place. WotC is making decisions about the direction they want to take their brand in. That's not an insult to you. They're not flipping you off. They're not kicking your dog. You are not being offended.

In fact, choosing to look at these decisions in a way that transforms them into offensive (rather than simply disappointing) actions is actually pretty worrisome. Is that how you go about your life? When someone makes a decision about their own business (whether they're a corporation or an individual) that you aren't a fan of, it becomes an insult? They don't exist to cater to you personally, and they are not beholden to you, personally.

So you can be disappointed. You can decide that their products aren't for you. You can long for the days when your wishes were the ones being fulfilled. But don't act insulted. That just reeks of everything unpleasant about the gaming community.

 

[billd91]

Interestingly enough, 4E players aren't getting the 3E treatment. There's no OGL for 4E - no potential for 3rd party carry-over etc. They've got it much worse.

Yes, I can certainly see how this thread is edition warring by proxy now. But I don't think I'd have called the thread an edition war until you chimed in with post #11. If you think this thread is edition warring, flag it. I know I'll be doing so now.

 

[Dannager]

Yes, I can certainly see how this thread is edition warring by proxy now.

He was talking about criticism of WotC being edition warring by proxy, not this thread.

But I don't think I'd have called the thread an edition war until you chimed in with post #11.

This is troubling. Do you think that highlighting the behavior of subsets of the gaming community in a thread about highlighting the behavior of subsets of the gaming community qualifies as edition warring? It seems like someone said something unflattering about the way people reacted to 4e, and suddenly you decided there was edition warring happening.

What I see, generally speaking, is that there tends to be a pervasive attitude that it's okay to criticize WotC and the people who run it when they behave in a way that part of the gaming community finds objectionable, but that it's not okay to criticize part of the gaming community when they behave in a way that others find objectionable (at least, not when the behavior in question is belligerence towards WotC). The first is seen as deserved, and the latter is seen as hostile.

In other words, the sentiment seems to be: "How dare you have an opinion of my opinion?"

 

[billd91]

This is troubling. Do you think that highlighting the behavior of subsets of the gaming community in a thread about highlighting the behavior of subsets of the gaming community qualifies as edition warring? It seems like someone said something unflattering about the way people reacted to 4e, and suddenly you decided there was edition warring happening.

That is the very essence of the edition warring - highlighting everybody else's actions and complaints as if they somehow aren't as legitimate as your own thoughts and feelings. It's the dismissals, the declaration that opinions are wrong, that are at the heart of the edition war, not the criticism of the games or companies involved.